Inspired by the similarity between vehicle interactions and particle interactions, a mechanical system with force elements is introduced to simulate a vehicle’s acceleration behavior in a multilane traffic flow. On the basis of Newton’s second law of motion, a subject vehicle’s longitudinal behavior is simulated with the interaction force induced by the neighboring vehicles and the driver’s driving preference. Five important factors—(a) subject vehicle’s speed, (b) acceleration sensitivity, (c) safety consideration, (d) relative speed sensitivity, and (e) gap-reducing desire—are considered; each is modeled by a force element. A recently developed data collection system is used to capture the testing driver’s acceleration behavior; the model parameters are calibrated with the traveler’s driving behavior. To demonstrate the present model, a microscopic simulation program was developed with MATLAB. The simulated trajectories not only describe a driver’s acceleration behavior in common scenarios but also accurately present complex, high-order behavior during multifaceted scenarios, such as lane changing or lead gap changing. The present model can be applied to single-lane and multilane car-following scenarios with the same algorithm.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SaifuzzamanM., and ZhengZ.. Incorporating Human-Factors in Car-Following Models: A Review of Recent Developments and Research Needs. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 48, 2014, pp. 379–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2014.09.008.
HamdarD. S.Driver Behavior Modeling. In Handbook of Intelligent Vehicles (EskandarianA., ed.), Springer, London, pp. 537–558.
4.
BrackstoneM., and McDonaldM.. Car-Following: A Historical Review. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1999, pp. 181–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(00)00005-X.
5.
PipesL. A.An Operational Analysis of Traffic Dynamics. Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 24, No. 3, 1953, pp. 274–281. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1721265.
6.
GippsP. G.A Behavioural Car-Following Model for Computer Simulation. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1981, pp. 105–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-2615(81)90037-0.
7.
OlstamJ. J., and TapaniA.. Comparison of Car-Following Models. Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, Linköping, 2004.
8.
BandoM., HasebeK., NakanishiK., NakayamaA., ShibataA., and SugiyamaY.. Phenomenological Study of Dynamical Model of Traffic Flow. Journal de Physique I, Vol. 5, No. 11, 1995, pp. 1389–1399. https://doi.org/10.1051/jp1:1995206.
9.
YuS., LiuQ., and LiX.. Full Velocity Difference and Acceleration Model for a Car-Following Theory. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, Vol. 18, No. 5, 2013, pp. 1229–1234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2012.09.014.
10.
HelbingD., and TilchB.. Generalized Force Model of Traffic Dynamics. Physical Review E, Vol. 58, No. 1, 1998, pp. 133–138. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.58.133.
11.
TreiberM., HenneckeA., and HelbingD.. Congested Traffic States in Empirical Observations and Microscopic Simulations. Physical Review E, Vol. 62, No. 2, 2000, pp. 1805–1824. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.62.1805.
12.
JiangR., WuQ. S., and ZhuZ. J.. Full Velocity Difference Model for a Car-Following Theory. Physical Review E, Vol. 64, No. 1, 2001, p. 017101. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.64.017101.
13.
WangJ., DingJ.-X., ShiQ., and KühneR. D.. Lane-Changing Behavior and Its Effect on Energy Dissipation Using Full Velocity Difference Model. International Journal of Modern Physics C, Vol. 27, No. 02, 2016, p. 1650013. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129183116500133.
14.
NagelK., WolfD. E., WagnerP., and SimonP.. Two-Lane Traffic Rules for Cellular Automata: A Systematic Approach. Physical Review E, Vol. 58, No. 2, 1998, pp. 1425–1437. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.58.1425.
15.
JiaB., JiangR., WuQ. S., and HuM. B.. Honk Effect in the Two-Lane Cellular Automaton Model for Traffic Flow. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, Vol. 348, 2005, pp. 544–552.
16.
LiX. G., JiaB., GaoZ. Y., and JiangR.. A Realistic Two-Lane Cellular Automata Traffic Model Considering Aggressive Lane-Changing Behavior of Fast Vehicle. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, Vol. 367, 2006, pp. 479–486.
17.
ToledoT., KoutsopoulosH. N., and Ben-AkivaM.. Integrated Driving Behavior Modeling. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2007, pp. 96–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2007.02.002.
18.
RahmanM., ChowdhuryM., XieY., and HeY.. Review of Microscopic Lane-Changing Models and Future Research Opportunities. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 14, No. 4, 2013, pp. 1942–1956. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2013.2272074.
19.
XiaoruiW., and HongxuY.. A Lane Change Model with the Consideration of Car Following Behavior. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 96, 2013, pp. 2354–2361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.264.
20.
YangL., and YinH.. Parametric Study of Particle Sedimentation by Dissipative Particle Dynamics Simulation. Physical Review E, Vol. 90, No. 3, 2014, p. 033311. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.90.033311.
21.
WangL., ChenF., and YinH.. Detecting and Tracking Vehicles in Traffic by Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Automation in Construction, Vol. 72, 2016, pp. 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.05.008.
22.
TangT., WangY., YangX., and WuY.. A New Car-Following Model Accounting for Varying Road Condition. Nonlinear Dynamics, Vol. 70, No. 2, 2012, pp. 1397–1405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-012-0542-8.
23.
PengG. H., and SunD. H.. A Dynamical Model of Car-Following with the Consideration of the Multiple Information of Preceding Cars. Physics Letters [Part A], Vol. 374, No. 15–16, 2010, pp. 1694–1698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2010.02.020.
24.
ChandlerR. E., HermanR., and MontrollE. W.. Traffic Dynamics: Studies in Car Following. Operations Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1958, pp. 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.6.2.165.
25.
van WinsumW.The Human Element in Car Following Models. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1999, pp. 207–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(00)00008-5.
26.
PunzoV., and TripodiA.. Steady-State Solutions and Multiclass Calibration of Gipps Microscopic Traffic Flow Model. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1999, 2007, pp. 104–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/1999-12.
27.
AhmedK. I., Ben-AkivaM. E., KoutsopoulosH. N., and MishalaniR. G.. Models of Freeway Lane Changing and Gap Acceptance Behavior. Pergamon Press, Oxford, United Kingdom, 1996.
28.
SiuhiS., and KasekoM. S.. Parametric Study of Stimulus-Response Behavior for Car-Following Models. Presented at 89th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2010.
29.
KoutsopoulosH. N., and FarahH.. Latent Class Model for Car Following Behavior. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 46, No. 5, 2012, pp. 563–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2012.01.001.
30.
GazisD. C., HermanR., and PottsR. B.. Car-Following Theory of Steady-State Traffic Flow. Operations Research, Vol. 7, No. 4, 1959, pp. 499–505. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.7.4.499.
31.
BroughtonK. L. M., SwitzerF., and ScottD.. Car Following Decisions Under Three Visibility Conditions and Two Speeds Tested with a Driving Simulator. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2007, pp. 106–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.06.009.
32.
SunD., KangY., and YangS.. A Novel Car Following Model Considering Average Speed of Preceding Vehicles Group. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, Vol. 436, 2015, pp. 103–109.
33.
WarnerH. W., and AbergL.. Drivers’ Decision to Speed: A Study Inspired by the Theory of Planned Behavior. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, Vol. 9, No. 6, 2006, pp. 427–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2006.03.004.
34.
JonesJ. E.On the Determination of Molecular Fields: II. From the Equation of State of a Gas. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, Vol. 106, No. 738, 1924, pp. 463–477. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1924.0082.
35.
GazisD. C., HermanR., and RotheryR. W.. Nonlinear Follow-the-Leader Models of Traffic Flow. Operations Research, Vol. 9, No. 4, 1961, pp. 545–567. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.9.4.545.
36.
HamdarS. H., TalebpourA., and DongJ.. Travel Time Reliability Versus Safety: A Stochastic Hazard-Based Modeling Approach. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2015, pp. 264–273. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2014.2331561.
37.
KestingA., TreiberM., and HelbingD.. General Lane-Changing Model MOBIL for Car-Following Models. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1999, 2007, pp. 86–94. https://doi.org/10.3141/1999-10.
38.
KnoopV. L., and BuissonC.. Calibration and Validation of Probabilistic Discretionary Lane-Change Models. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2015, pp. 834–843.
39.
HidasP.Modelling Lane Changing and Merging in Microscopic Traffic Simulation. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 10, No. 5–6, 2002, pp. 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0968-090X(02)00026-8.
40.
HidasP.Modelling Vehicle Interactions in Microscopic Simulation of Merging and Weaving. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2005, pp. 37–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2004.12.003.
41.
ZhengZ.Recent Developments and Research Needs in Modeling Lane Changing. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 60, 2014, pp. 16–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2013.11.009.
